|
On September 18 2011 19:27 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +Haha whoever says that terran isn't op seriously go watch Marineking vs Losira Game 1... it was roughly 50 drones to 17 scvs at the 13 min mark...... sure marineking played a pretty sweet game, but seriously you've got to be freaking kidding me.... he made like a total of 3 tanks and only marines and marauders and the medivacs didnt come out till like the very very end of the game
EDIT* Go watch game two now..... terran is pretty hilarious That's a horrible thing to say man. MKP had 3 OC's. I'm pretty sure he made that third OC as a response to what happened, but he was able to pump SCV's quite fast after that. Meanwhile Losira only had 2 bases (and a macro hatch), he didn't have lair to get bane speed or anything crucial like that, and he lost a lot of drones. His mass ling attack at the start also really hurt him (him losing 30 lings is essentially MKP killing 15 drones). It may have looked like Losira was ahead, but there was no way for MKP to lose after the horrible follow-up decisions such as not taking a third, the failed continued aggression, and that horrible ling run-in at the start. I definitely know what you mean when someone says "terran op... fucking 17 scvs and still wins wtf" but this game is not an example of that.
I would say this is a perfect example of that, if any other race was down to 17 workers vs 50 of the other person, regardless of expansions at 13 mins, they have lost, and saying he had a 3rd cc is just silly cas losira had a 3rd hatch also, so stayed equal in that, the point is that mules allowed him to constantly produce units and SCV's, so while forcing losira to make units, he could still make SCV's, and constant pressure stopped losira being able to get too far ahead, yes the 3rd should have been faster, but when you kill that many SCV's, it shouldnt make a fucking difference what your folow up plan is, because it should be game over, imagine for4 a second if you will, what a game would look like if terran had done that and its 17 drones to say 40 SCV's and mules (equivilant of 50 drones) they game would be over so fast, even Artosis wouldnt raise his voice or get excited in the battle man.
It is broken, and that game along with others make it apparent
|
Terran needs MULEs to keep up with larva inject and chrono boost, and vice versa. At the lower levels Terrans save up scans, but at the higher levels terran can't just rely on scans. A terran wasting money on turrets means they can't be aggressive either. I agree that burrowed roaches are just totally useless (both in ZvT and ZvP), but the idea that burrow or DT is useless against terran is ridiculous.
You are missing the point. Watch Hero vs Thorzain game 3. Thorzain has no idea what's coming and has nothing prepared against DT's, yet he survives where P would have died without observers and Z would have died without spores. The problem not so much that scans are "free"(they are not), its that scan makes detection is available as a default option for terran. It dimishes the importance of scouting and it contributes to what Koreans describe to be terran's ability to be safe no matter what you do.
You can always choose between scan or mule. Get caught as Z with your pants down against DT's and there's no choice to be made.
Hydras are useless, I agree with that - they to mutas, they lose to double starport phoenix, they lose to banshees and thors and marines. But Zerg's t1 is perfectly fine, I think the decision to remove AA from zerg units is great. Zerg doesn't need a 'true ranged attacker' at t1. Zerg's t1 is fine.
No. Simply not. You think it's fine because you've never seen how people lived in fear of the BW hydra all-in. A single bunker or forcefield was not enough to stop a determined Zerg. Giving us the fat, slow, short-ranged roach was a colossal mistake. Sure it's got great HP, but that doesnt matter when you are trying to bust a base entrance. Range matters. Don't even get me started on Zerg's unique ability to outright lose vs 2-port builds (in the GSL, not bronze) because of how great AA queens are.
While Zerg does lack a space control method against Protoss, they did overlap for the most part. I'm glad they removed lurkers and replaced them with banelings. I don't want a zerg siege tank, and there are a lot of issues with lurkers in SC2 (it was in alpha, and with terrans scans/detection...). If there were lurkers instead of banes, ZvT would be a turtlefest instead of the ling/bane/muta vs terran epic battles we have.
Again, watch jaedong use lurkers. They add a LOT to the matchup. Zerg was originally intended to have the lurker in SC2, if you think this was some carefully deliberated genius design you are fooling yourself. Lurkers were in the game mere months before open beta, and nobody understood where they were when beta launched.
|
My thoughts on Terran: Mules need to be nerfed
It is fact Terran techs the fastest
Macros the best in sc2. They macro better than Zerg.
Best harrasment
Best scouting
best defense
Best ground to ground
best air to air
Bliz please do something
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit.
Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell.
It is fact Terran techs the fastest
Macros the best in sc2. They macro better than Zerg.
Best harrasment
Best scouting
best defense
Best ground to ground
best air to air
What?
A terran doesn't macro better than a zerg, a zerg can remax instantly and that's off like 3 hatcheries, Terran need like 20 barracks or something crazy in the late game to keep up with toss and zerg production.
We may have the best hurrasment, but that's because Protoss and Zerg haven't really explored all the options, baneling drops in the minerals, warp prism hurass and others are good, Terran are just the best designed race due to the fact WoL was first.
Best scouting? Possibly, but Zerg have overlords and Protoss have observers which you can use to scout. Overlords are practically free late game.
Best Defense? I'm not going to lie, Bunkers are good sure, but we need to fill them with units which is units not in the army. It's the same as SC1 in that regard. Turrets are really expensive and die really fast. Zerg players really are too scared of undefended turrets.
Best ground to ground, really? I'm not seeing it. Late game Protoss and Zerg armies are far better than Terran unless you go mech.
Best Air to Air? I'd say AtA is pretty balanced. In PvZ Pheonix's are great against mutas, but mutas are good against vikings and vikings are good against pheonixs. Corrupters are mainly just the AtA against Massive units like Carriers and BCs, because they're not used that much it's not often they get to use their full potential as AtA.
|
On September 18 2011 21:25 Tippecanoe wrote:
OMFG I just all my marines to banelings!
L2 micro
OMFG i just got my whole army emp'd because i can't spread out my units!
Terran OP!
Good luck with that when terran has 6 emps in his army and cloaks his ghosts. He could attack at any time... *shifty eyes*
|
On September 18 2011 21:42 Qikz wrote:
Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit.
Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell.
That's a pretty good point.
Although one could say that due to the clumping mechanics every aoe is a lot more efficient (except Storm that had its radius significantly reduced for the same reason). Most games in any matchup that go past midgame are decided almost exclusively by aoe damage/effects, and there's not a single balance change that can fix that (other than making aoe completely useless).
So it's more that the control group clumping mechanics i broken as hell ^_^ and it all stems from the bizarre decision to allow unlimited control groups in the first place.
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On September 18 2011 21:47 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 21:42 Qikz wrote:
Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit.
Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell. That's a pretty good point. Although one could say that due to the clumping mechanics every aoe is a lot more efficient (except Storm that had its radius significantly reduced for the same reason). Most games in any matchup that go past midgame are decided almost exclusively by aoe damage/effects, and there's not a single balance change that can fix that (other than making aoe completely useless). So it's more that the control group clumping mechanics is broken as hell ^_^ and it all stems from the bizarre decision to allow unlimited control groups.
The only reason their was limited control groups on BW is because the way the AI worked (broken pathing) and also back then I can't think of a single RTS that has had unlimited control groups. The genre has evolved and new control mechanics have come with it. You don't have to use everything on one control group, it's just an option if you want to.
The player who micros better in the battle will win, even before the battle to reduce the damage of storms, fungal and EMP.
|
On September 18 2011 21:42 Qikz wrote:Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit. Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell. Show nested quote +It is fact Terran techs the fastest
Macros the best in sc2. They macro better than Zerg.
Best harrasment
Best scouting
best defense
Best ground to ground
best air to air What? A terran doesn't macro better than a zerg, a zerg can remax instantly and that's off like 3 hatcheries, Terran need like 20 barracks or something crazy in the late game to keep up with toss and zerg production. How the fuck do you afford to remax on 3 hatcheries? What a shitty point.
|
A terran doesn't macro better than a zerg, a zerg can remax instantly and that's off like 3 hatcheries, Terran need like 20 barracks or something crazy in the late game to keep up with toss and zerg production.
And? Believe it or not, you can make more production buildings. I see Protoss players with warp-gates in the 10+ range on 3 bases, going even higher when maxed. Zerg make macro hatches, and their expansions provide production too- their infrastructure is cheap, but not supernatural. Protoss and Zerg don't magically produce fater than Terran (except for Protoss warp-in being instant); the production infrastructure is just cheaper. Given it's almost all minerals, I am certain Terran can afford a 'crazy' 20 barracks in the late game.
|
Can protoss even expand safely against terran? It seems every single protoss expansion build has a reasonably standard terran response.This creates a scenario where the terran player has to allow protoss to expand.
In BW terran had lifting buildings, bunkers because they needed a lot of safety to expand, they couldn`t rely on crappy marines to defend. Protoss had to expand outside their base with no defensive structures, but they at least could rely on their strong gateway units. In SC2 protoss has to expand with crappy gateway units, no defensive structures while terran has the control due to how powerful bio is, bunkers and lifting CC are just the icing on the cake.
I feel blizzard tried to change the way the races play drastically while keeping a lot of mechanics, for now it seems they failed at it.
|
This terrible thread is a shining example of why balance discussions are fruitless. Everyone is just posting what they lost to in their rage be it especially Terran or Zerg or ProtossZ
|
On September 18 2011 21:42 Qikz wrote:Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit. Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell. Show nested quote +It is fact Terran techs the fastest
Macros the best in sc2. They macro better than Zerg.
Best harrasment
Best scouting
best defense
Best ground to ground
best air to air What? A terran doesn't macro better than a zerg, a zerg can remax instantly and that's off like 3 hatcheries, Terran need like 20 barracks or something crazy in the late game to keep up with toss and zerg production. We may have the best hurrasment, but that's because Protoss and Zerg haven't really explored all the options, baneling drops in the minerals, warp prism hurass and others are good, Terran are just the best designed race due to the fact WoL was first. Best scouting? Possibly, but Zerg have overlords and Protoss have observers which you can use to scout. Overlords are practically free late game. Best Defense? I'm not going to lie, Bunkers are good sure, but we need to fill them with units which is units not in the army. It's the same as SC1 in that regard. Turrets are really expensive and die really fast. Zerg players really are too scared of undefended turrets. Best ground to ground, really? I'm not seeing it. Late game Protoss and Zerg armies are far better than Terran unless you go mech. Best Air to Air? I'd say AtA is pretty balanced. In PvZ Pheonix's are great against mutas, but mutas are good against vikings and vikings are good against pheonixs. Corrupters are mainly just the AtA against Massive units like Carriers and BCs, because they're not used that much it's not often they get to use their full potential as AtA.
You can't baneling drop a terran cos of turrets, Warp prism is much more viable. My main issue is things like salvage, lift-off, repair, mules, scan, planetary fortress and building upgrades make terran so, so, so versatile.
I think vikings beat muta 1:1, and a thor or a handful of marines easily tips that in terran favor. Tanks>anything on ground.
|
On September 18 2011 21:40 Cartel wrote:
My thoughts on Terran: Mules need to be nerfed
It is fact Terran techs the fastest
Macros the best in sc2. They macro better than Zerg.
Best harrasment
Best scouting
best defense
Best ground to ground
best air to air
Bliz please do something
my thoughts on you: you came directly from the official blizzard forums, where you were ignored and laughed at
you dont prove any of your points
you add nothing to the discussion
you just whine
you use punctuation marks for the sole pupose to underline your "arguments"
you deserve to be warned
TL please do something
In BW terran had lifting buildings, bunkers because they needed a lot of safety to expand, they couldn`t rely on crappy marines to defend. Protoss had to expand outside their base with no defensive structures, but they at least could rely on their strong gateway units. In SC2 protoss has to expand with crappy gateway units, no defensive structures while terran has the control due to how powerful bio is, bunkers and lifting CC are just the icing on the cake.
umm.. yeah.. no. i heard sentries are pretty good in the early game and even though i dont really understand your point im pretty sure with a solid opening and scouting you can play safe even as PROTOSS in pvt without falling behind (sounds impossible as you describe it)
This terrible thread is a shining example of why balance discussions are fruitless. Everyone is just posting what they lost to in their rage be it especially Terran or Zerg or Protoss
agree. 
|
On September 18 2011 21:49 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 21:47 Talin wrote:On September 18 2011 21:42 Qikz wrote:
Lurkers in SC2 were horribly imbalanced. Think of what a hellion can do now to a bunch of unupgraded zerglings then think of that at a longer range agaisnt every single unit.
Due to clumping mechanics in SC2, Lurkers in their current state were broken as hell. That's a pretty good point. Although one could say that due to the clumping mechanics every aoe is a lot more efficient (except Storm that had its radius significantly reduced for the same reason). Most games in any matchup that go past midgame are decided almost exclusively by aoe damage/effects, and there's not a single balance change that can fix that (other than making aoe completely useless). So it's more that the control group clumping mechanics is broken as hell ^_^ and it all stems from the bizarre decision to allow unlimited control groups. The only reason their was limited control groups on BW is because the way the AI worked (broken pathing) and also back then I can't think of a single RTS that has had unlimited control groups. The genre has evolved and new control mechanics have come with it. You don't have to use everything on one control group, it's just an option if you want to.
Eh, that's just a popular myth that as far as I'm aware wasn't ever substantiated by any kind of evidence and sounds awfully dodgy. Even if there's a tiny bit of truth in that, just because technology allows you to do something doesn't mean it's a better design choice, or that it will produce better gameplay.
SC2 seems to use a very tight flocking algorithm. The technology in late 90's was perfectly capable of implementing / running this behavior smoothly in an rts game (Age of Empires 2 even had complex group formations implemented). It's really not some cutting edge stuff that was only made possible in 2005. -_-
Whether you use everything in one group or not in SC2 is completely irrelevant, because the "clumping" will happen regardless which means that you'll almost always eat a full effect of emps, storms, fungals, etc - UNLESS you actively manually split your units all the time. One of the biggest complaints about BW was that players had to "fight a bad interface/AI" to get their units to do what they want to - kinda ironic because that's exactly the problem with SC2's grouping/pathfinding.
|
On September 18 2011 21:35 WarrickHunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 19:27 Belial88 wrote:Haha whoever says that terran isn't op seriously go watch Marineking vs Losira Game 1... it was roughly 50 drones to 17 scvs at the 13 min mark...... sure marineking played a pretty sweet game, but seriously you've got to be freaking kidding me.... he made like a total of 3 tanks and only marines and marauders and the medivacs didnt come out till like the very very end of the game
EDIT* Go watch game two now..... terran is pretty hilarious That's a horrible thing to say man. MKP had 3 OC's. I'm pretty sure he made that third OC as a response to what happened, but he was able to pump SCV's quite fast after that. Meanwhile Losira only had 2 bases (and a macro hatch), he didn't have lair to get bane speed or anything crucial like that, and he lost a lot of drones. His mass ling attack at the start also really hurt him (him losing 30 lings is essentially MKP killing 15 drones). It may have looked like Losira was ahead, but there was no way for MKP to lose after the horrible follow-up decisions such as not taking a third, the failed continued aggression, and that horrible ling run-in at the start. I definitely know what you mean when someone says "terran op... fucking 17 scvs and still wins wtf" but this game is not an example of that. I would say this is a perfect example of that, if any other race was down to 17 workers vs 50 of the other person, regardless of expansions at 13 mins, they have lost, and saying he had a 3rd cc is just silly cas losira had a 3rd hatch also, so stayed equal in that, the point is that mules allowed him to constantly produce units and SCV's, so while forcing losira to make units, he could still make SCV's, and constant pressure stopped losira being able to get too far ahead, yes the 3rd should have been faster, but when you kill that many SCV's, it shouldnt make a fucking difference what your folow up plan is, because it should be game over, imagine for4 a second if you will, what a game would look like if terran had done that and its 17 drones to say 40 SCV's and mules (equivilant of 50 drones) they game would be over so fast, even Artosis wouldnt raise his voice or get excited in the battle man. It is broken, and that game along with others make it apparent
The thing is that Terrans need their SCVs for far more than simply gathering resources and constructing buildings. You need them for repairs and "front row bunker/turret construction". Due to this "front duty" they are lost more easily compared to Zerg / Protoss workers and because of this the MULE is a fair deal. This ... and the fact that you need one SCV per building under construction ... is the reason for the existence of the MULE. Zerg use up larvae permanently, BUT they dont need to build as many buildings as Terrans and Protoss can build a whole base with just one Probe.
If you are for the abolition of the MULE there have to be equal things lost on the Protoss / Zerg sides ... and I would be fine with it if there was no more Chronoboost & Larvae inject in addition to getting rid of the MULE.
I have detailed my thoughts on this earlier in the thread and am of the opinion that the game would be easier to balance without these "macro boosters" AND with one other change (a change to the perfectly tight unit movement).
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=37#734
Question: Did LosirA have a "3rd hatch" or a "3rd base"? One of them increases your income potential and the other doesnt. Macro hatches only increase your potential worker construction rate but not your income; a third CC can increase your income due to the MULE.
|
The biggest problem with terran is not the first 15 min ,even if terran has a huge edvantage early game i dont see that as a problem force fields are that good. The problem is after 20 min and thats because of the emp. Agaiinst zerg you need to do everything you can to make him not build drones if he can just stand and macro your fucked if the zerg knows whats going on. Thats why i dont play this anymore.
|
On September 18 2011 22:34 rdr wrote:
The biggest problem with terran is not the first 15 min ,even if terran has a huge edvantage early game i dont see that as a problem force fields are that good. The problem is after 20 min and thats because of the emp. Agaiinst zerg you need to do everything you can to make him not build drones if he can just stand and macro your fucked if the zerg knows whats going on. Thats why i dont play this anymore.
Zerg-point: Thats why you have marines. They are so fucking good and cheap that you can push with them ALL THE TIME!!
Its funny how Terrans started whining about infestor. Why? Because it counters marines. They dont want to mine gas because marines kill EVERYTHING.
|
I would say marines are too good before and after stim. Also Ghosts are too good (both snipe and emp).
I would reduce marine damage or dps but give them 5 more health to begin with. Then shield upgrade would give them only +5.
As for ghosts, snipe needs to have a cooldown and emp a bit smaller radius.
|
On September 18 2011 22:10 Elementsu wrote:
Can protoss even expand safely against terran? It seems every single protoss expansion build has a reasonably standard terran response.This creates a scenario where the terran player has to allow protoss to expand.
In BW terran had lifting buildings, bunkers because they needed a lot of safety to expand, they couldn`t rely on crappy marines to defend. Protoss had to expand outside their base with no defensive structures, but they at least could rely on their strong gateway units. In SC2 protoss has to expand with crappy gateway units, no defensive structures while terran has the control due to how powerful bio is, bunkers and lifting CC are just the icing on the cake.
I feel blizzard tried to change the way the races play drastically while keeping a lot of mechanics, for now it seems they failed at it.
Excellent point. They switched up terran completely, from a race that's pretty weak and vulnerable in the early game to a race that basically has the strongest openings, and yet that race retains lift and bunkers! Hell, bunkers are even buffed from BW (salvage).
@ the person who said "sentries": sentries are an excellent defensive unit, yes, but they're much less useful when you take your natural and there's no ramp to forcefield there.
|
On September 19 2011 00:08 -Archangel- wrote:
I would say marines are too good before and after stim. Also Ghosts are too good (both snipe and emp).
I would reduce marine damage or dps but give them 5 more health to begin with. Then shield upgrade would give them only +5.
As for ghosts, snipe needs to have a cooldown and emp a bit smaller radius.
ye thought about a similar thing yesterday. its obviously related to bw but whatever...
take combatshields away and give them the range upgrade they had in sc1. that would give stalkers an edge early on i guess. althou it probably would be a useless change in the longrun :-/
edit: and in bw the marine was very strong aswell...think about deep six in TvP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
